Guess it's a buy-out now. Inevitable, I guess, but you can't fault Gillis for trying every avenue to get out of it. More names getting thrown out in waivers - regular or buy-out. Don't think anybody is doing anybody else any favours here, not even the cap-floor teams.

I was happy when the Ballard trade went down. I thought he’d be a good, versatile addition to the team. Ballard was a good player in Phoenix. I didn’t seem him much in Florida, but he was a tenacious, hard working defenseman in Phoenix.

I don’t know what the hell happened. Clearly the issues weren’t just coaching as Ballard couldn’t do a damn thing right no matter the situation. I wonder if he just got fat and lazy after his big contract was signed, but he was terrible here. He wasn’t a hard worker, he wasn’t tenacious and we saw nearly zero offensive ability from him and a lot of defensive issues.

herb wrote:I was happy when the Ballard trade went down. I thought he’d be a good, versatile addition to the team. Ballard was a good player in Phoenix. I didn’t seem him much in Florida, but he was a tenacious, hard working defenseman in Phoenix.

I don’t know what the hell happened. Clearly the issues weren’t just coaching as Ballard couldn’t do a damn thing right no matter the situation. I wonder if he just got fat and lazy after his big contract was signed, but he was terrible here. He wasn’t a hard worker, he wasn’t tenacious and we saw nearly zero offensive ability from him and a lot of defensive issues.

We should have kept Rome and moved Ballard last off season.

Ballard's last year in Florida wasn't bad, statistically-speaking. His problem was he got off to a bad start on a team which was challenging for the Cup, had a coach who had no room for error on the part of his D - especially noobs, and a D-corps which sported too many lefties and not enough righties. He had to try adjusting to a new side of the ice, a new system (to which other noob players had had trouble adjusting), injuries and a coach who was more than willing to bench his ass for every little mistake.

Can you fault the guy for playing tentative and without confidence? Hard to play aggressive if you're afraid of being caught out of position and then benched the rest of the game. His game was about taking chances, and that wasn't going to fly with Vigneault.

Square peg trying to fit into a round hole. I liked the trade myself on the face of it, but it makes you wonder if a different coach couldn't have used Ballard better. I understand Gillis' drive for depth on D, but you wish he would have found a better fit.

After watching Ballard a few years, that's exactly how I feel. He is probably the best skater on the team, but the AV system had no plays for a puck-carrying defenseman taking the puck to the corner by himself. As a result he'd dazzle with his wheels and nothing would come of it because nobody else knew what to do to give him puck support.

Ballard will be a 20+min guy on a shitty team where he's given the room to play his style, rather than a good team where there are clearly-delineated systems and no room for creativity.

Keith Ballard had 162 games as a Vancouver Canuck to show that he was a competent NHL defenseman. Many of these games were on the left side and the third pairing playing against weaker opposition. He still did not look competent. In fact, most nights he looked like a piece of shit. At least Rome had some asshole in him and didn’t have a handful of egregious defensive lapses a game. Hell, Rome actually scored the odd goal too.

I defended Ballard for a long time, but the bottom line is that he sucks.

ESQ wrote:...but the AV system had no plays for a puck-carrying defenseman taking the puck to the corner by himself. As a result he'd dazzle with his wheels and nothing would come of it because nobody else knew what to do to give him puck support.

Ballard will be a 20+min guy on a shitty team where he's given the room to play his style, rather than a good team where there are clearly-delineated systems and no room for creativity.

When Erhoff left, I can't remember the Canucks D ever consistently rushing the puck into the offensive zone - not even Edler. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it just seemed that it was nothing but break-out passes to the forwards with the D sometimes jumping in as the trailer.

Not sure why Vigneault gave up on it, because you're right - Ballard can rush up the ice and so can Edler. Even Bieksa can take it in, but you're right in that they'd gain the blueline and then they had no options because the forwards were not in position half the time.

herb wrote:We should have kept Rome and moved Ballard last off season.

If Vigneault wasn't going to use the tools Ballard brought to the table, by all means they should have kept Rome instead. For what they used Ballard to do, Rome would have done the job cheaper and better.

As for him being a lazy, shitty player, I don't buy that. The guy had no confidence in his game. He played to not make mistakes and ended up making mistakes of omission vice commission. Would he be a better player on a shitty team with no structure? Probably, but not because he's a shitty player but because he would have more leeway to play his game - it just wasn't the type of game Vigneault was going to employ.

Lancer wrote:If Vigneault wasn't going to use the tools Ballard brought to the table, by all means they should have kept Rome instead. For what they used Ballard to do, Rome would have done the job cheaper and better.

Bullshit.

What tools does Ballard have that AV forbade him from using? It certainly wasn’t his shooting, passing, vision or awareness.

Do you seriously think that if AV/Bowness had given Ballard free reign to rush up and down the ice he would have somehow worked out? How would this have improved Ballard’s poor defensive play, spotty decision making and poor execution?

herb wrote:Do you seriously think that if AV/Bowness had given Ballard free reign to rush up and down the ice he would have somehow worked out?

That's what he did in Florida, and not too badly - albeit for a team of Florida's calibre. He was a better player in Florida than he was in Vancouver. Beyond your lazy ascription that he just put his feet up and collected his paycheque (really?), how else would you explain this difference in play?

herb wrote:How would this have improved Ballard’s poor defensive play, spotty decision making and poor execution?

I dunno, maybe letting him maintain/develop his confidence while letting him make a mistake or two? By choking him on a short leash he was afraid to make mistakes out there, which led him to make all those errors you describe above.

That's one big reason I'm glad Vigneault got the heave-ho, he had become so risk-averse that he had this team playing scared and expected them to generate their own confidence and inspiration. Given that he and Bowness had their foot on Ballard's jersey almost since he got here, is it any surprise - especially when he sees nothing coming out of the leadership in the room but despondency - that he performed how he did?

Last edited by Lancer on Tue Jul 02, 2013 10:50 am, edited 1 time in total.